RI: Collins is the no. 2

[DieHardSkinsFan777]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

What an incredibly inane statement. For the last two years WE HAVE BEEN DEVELOPING CAMPBELL. In case you forgot, we drafted him in 2005. Although I haven't looked back, I'm betting you were one who blasted the pick b/c it meant that Gibbs was gonna let your boy Patrick go.

As for drafting developmental QB's - since 2000 we have drafted the following QB's:

2000 - Todd Husak (6th Round)
2001 - Sage Rosenfels (4th Round)
2002 - Patrick Ramsey (1st Round)
2003 - Gibram Hamdan (7th Round)
2005 - Jason Campbell (1st Round)
2007 - Jordan Palmer (6th Round)

The Skins consistently pick up young QB's in hopes one will develop. Throw in Casey Bramlett and that's a lot of young developmental QB's. The fact that they did not pan is not entirely Gibbs fault. The QB position is almost impossible to hit on. Take a look at this: NFL Draft History: Full Draft - by Position

In the year 2000, six QB's were chosen before Tom Brady including such notables as Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman and Tee Martin.

Take a look at the classes of:
2001 (Michael Vick's year) - 11 QB's chosen, one current starter (two including Vick - who would be a starter but for, well you know...)
2002 (Ramsey, Harrington, Carr): 15 QB's chosen - one starter (David Garrard).
2003: (Carson Palmer): 13 QB's chosen - two starters (R. Grossman) and some second tier guys (Leftwich, Boller, Simms)
2004 (Manning, Rivers, Rothlesberger): 17 QB's chosen, 4 starters (M. Schaub - starting for a team that DIDNT DRAFT HIM).

Of the 56 QB's choosen between 2001-2004, how many of the non-starters are even in the NFL? My rough estimate based on name recognition is about 10 with most of those from the more recent drafts. How many of the non-starters are actually back-ups for the teams that originally drafted them?? The only ones that I saw were Feeley and Chris Simms. There may be a couple more.

From 2002 to present we have had six developmental QB's (including Bramlett and Hamdan). Of which one is the current starter - which looks to me to be pretty much in line with the NFL ratio.

To say that we "should have addressed it in the draft a long time ago" ignores reality and is simply wrong.

BTW: Here are Beathard's QB's (78-89) with the Skins -
1981 - Tom Flick, 4th Round
1982 - Bob Holly, 11th Round
1983 - Babe Laufenberg, 6th Round
1984 - Jay Schroeder, 3rd Round
1986 - Mark Rypien, 4th Round
1988 - Stan Humphries, 6th round

Three starters, a career backup and two no-names. Pretty good odds and clearly way above the norm.



Did you watch the last half of the 4th preseason game?? Did you need to see more? He had a friggin month to prepare, it was his big chance and he f'ing stunk up the joint. AND it was pretty clear that his perfomance wasn't out of character for him - show me one report !ONE REPORT! that indicated he was solid practice squad material based on his training camp perfomance. EVERYTHING I read seemed to indicate that his performance in the preseason game was pretty much on par with his play in practice. What? we should take time/reps from QB's who may actually be required to play for us so that the guy who hasn't done anything to show differently can confirm his scrubbiness??

You only need to smell sh** to know what it is. You don't need to touch it and taste it too. I guess I'll go with the coach who won three superbowls with three different QB's when it comes to the analysis of an individual QB's potential.

Good post. We think we have our guy NOW in JC that will be seen this year.

IMO, JC's our future and will prove it on the field. As far as keeping Todd/#2 & Mark/#3 which was played out on the field. We have great veteran depth at QB either guy can come in and win games for you if need be. This will probually be the last year for Mark if I had to guess.

But I really like where we are at this season this year at QB.

[Dlyne8r]

I don't know offiss, Collins didn't completely stink up the joint this pre-season. Worst case scenario, we've got Brunell (go ahead haters...pile on).

[skinsfan_nn]

I think either MB or TC will do a fine job in a backup roll. TC has looked better in pre-season, and Joe has said whoever played the best would earn the spot so there you have it......he has.

MB is also a proven leader and his arm looks strong and IMO can still come in and win games for you with no problem.

Hopefully we see JC progress as we think he will. I think we are in real good shape at QB!

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by skinsfan_nn

MB is also a proven leader and his arm looks strong and IMO can still come in and win games for you with no problem.

Ha! No problem?! What if there's a pass rush, or 3rd and 8, or a 4th quarter deficit?

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Ha! No problem?! What if there's a pass rush, or 3rd and 8, or a 4th quarter deficit?

You mean like when we were down by 13 to dallas late in the 4th quater? And MB threw two long balls to SM for two quick TD's to WIN the game.....?

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by skinsfan_nn

You mean like when we were down by 13 to dallas late in the 4th quater? And MB threw two long balls to SM for two quick TD's to WIN the game.....?

Here we go again... Let's defend Brunell with the game where he used up the last bit of his magic, two effing years ago.

And I was kidding... sort of.

[70Chip]

I wish he had made Brunell 2nd string just to piss every one off. Get over the Brunell thing. Who gives a shit. If Campbell goes down and Collins has to play and doesn't play well, you will all be screaming for Brunell quick fast in a hurry.

[skinsnut]

Two points:

1. Gibbs doesn't care how much you make as a 1st, 2nd or 3rd stringer.
He claims he puts the best player forward, regardless...this I believe.

2. Regarding trading Brunell. I really dont think that is possible anymore even if they wanted to. Remember, they extended Cooley's contract.
I dont know the cap hit ramifications of a potential Brunell trade.

does anyone know if a Brunell trade is even possible according to the cap?

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Ha! No problem?! What if there's a pass rush, or 3rd and 8, or a 4th quarter deficit?

See Dallas game, 05 season.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by hooskins

See Dallas game, 05 season.

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Here we go again... Let's defend Brunell with the game where he used up the last bit of his magic, two effing years ago.

And I was kidding... sort of.

See 90% of the games he started as a Redskin. And it's not like I even hate Brunell. I just take issue with the idea that he could come in and win games "with no problem". I actually like having him as the #2... apparently more than Coach Gibbs does.

[12thMan]

For what's it worth, the third stringer rarely takes snaps with the first team.

I still think Brunell's name could surface in tpossible trade talks.

[BrudLee]

I will agree with offiss on one matter (looks outside to see if it is raining fish). To have a third string QB making as much as the 1st and 2nd stringers combined (and that's after drastically reducing his salary!) against the cap is not a sure sign of competance. While I applaud the decision to make Collins the #2, as he clearly deserved it from his preseason performance, Brunell should be given the opportunity to compete elsewhere, and on someone else's dime.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by BrudLee

I will agree with offiss on one matter (looks outside to see if it is raining fish). To have a third string QB making as much as the 1st and 2nd stringers combined (and that's after drastically reducing his salary!) against the cap is not a sure sign of competance. While I applaud the decision to make Collins the #2, as he clearly deserved it from his preseason performance, Brunell should be given the opportunity to compete elsewhere, and on someone else's dime.

That pretty much sums it up. No way we can justify Brunell being on the roster as a "safety valve" or "insurance"for all the money we're paying him.

This could have been a preemptive move in order to later trade Brunell without drastically affecting the depth chart.

[12thMan]

I wonder if this decreases Brunell's trade value on the market?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I wonder if this decreases Brunell's trade value on the market?

Can it go much lower?

We'd be lucky to get a 5th or 6th as it is.